Kristian Kielhofner wrote:
> Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
>> But gratuituously making easy something that very few people have a
>> legitimate need to do, which undermines something that -- even if you
>> do only make the resaonable assumption that you know which phone, and
>> not which person, is calling -- is useful and productive... is probably
>> a Bad Idea. Full disclosure notwithstanding.
>>>> Cheers,
>> -- jra
>> jra,
>> Sprint made the mistake. That is ridiculous...
>> Caller ID has not been secure for a long time. If you think that
> it should be made secure now, you are out of touch with reality
> because that is NOT going to happen. It has been made easy. It is
> ubiquitous. Get over it :)!
>> The only options now are to not trust caller id, ask more
> questions (i.e. get better identity systems and processes in place),
> and, as I said, enforce laws that we already have.
>> I think you missed my point that setting caller id in a nefarious
> way is almost always used as a tool in an action that is already
> defined as a crime. The things you are talking about doing are
> already illegal - whether or not you are spoofing caller id. Granted,
> caller id does make it easier, but if we didn't have the ability to
> set caller id the crooks would still be scamming, harassing, etc just
> like they are now. They would just be using other tools to do it or
> make it easier for them.
>> --
> Kristian Kielhofner
>I set caller ID to a unique identifier before sending to a transfer
partner or overflow call center. This makes it much easier to match
CDRs and get stats on the outcome of calls once they leave our center.
It is a very valuable and legitimate use. Am I committing a crime? nah.
We use and trust ANI, not caller ID although I think I read you can
manipulate ANI if you have an SS7 link. I have yet to play with SS7.
Thanks,
Steve Totaro